Summing Up

Having started on a journey that first took us to Mycenae,
but then also to Tiryns, Olympia, Pylos and a number of other ancient
sites on the mainland of Greece and the Peloponnesos, also on Crete, Cyprus,
the Troad and the interior of Asia Minor, we found at all sites one and
the same embarrassing problem: close to five hundred years between conflicting
evidences or discordant views. The list of archaeological sites discussed
could be enlarged to encompass almost every excavated place in the area,
with hardly any of them standing a chance of escaping the very same perplexing
state of affairs.1

What I call here the perplexing state of affairs
often took the form of a disputeto which of the two ages, separated
by nearly half a millennium, does a stratum, a building, or a tomb belong?
The holders of conflicting views are usually at equal disadvantage in
meeting archaeological facts that, with the conventional chronological
scheme not questioned, point simultaneously to two widely separated ages.
Was Tiryns palace rebuilt in the Mycenaean or in the Ionic Agein
other words, in the Bronze Age or in the Iron Age? And if the first alternative
is selected, how could it be that for almost five hundred years the building
lay abandoned, unoccupied by any of the twenty intermediate generations,
since they left nothing of their own, no relic whatsoever? The alternative
situation is equally beset with perplexing evidence.

Are the Mycenaean lions, carved in the peculiar position
of standing erect on their hind legs facing a pillar that divides them,
contemporary with similar Phrygian monumental sculptures, and if not,
how does one explain the many centuries gap? How is it that the
wall of the Phrygian Gate at Gordion is built like that of Troy VI, if
some five hundred years separate them? In what way does one explain the
affinity of Mycenaean art of the pre-twelfth century with the art of Scythia,
the Danubian region, and Etruria of the eighth and seventh centuries?
Was the great strife between Furtwaengler and Doerpfeld ever resolved?
Because two timetables are applied simultaneously to the past of Greece,
a clash of opinions is almost inevitable.

How is it that Greece and the entire Aegean area of the
Mycenaean Age suddenly became depopulated, with scarcely any traces of
human activity surviving? And if such was the case, how is it that so
many details of Mycenaean life, habits and armaments were well known to
Homer who knew equally well the life, habits, and armaments of the eighth
and seventh century, though a Dark Age of several centuries duration
intervened?

When the decipherment of the Mycenaean Linear B script,
to the surprise of many Hellenist scholars proved the language to be Greek,
the so-called Homeric problem did not approach a solution but, contrariwise,
grew more urgent, more enigmatic, more perplexing. The historians were
startled because the Minoan-Mycenaean inscriptions are ascribed by them
at the latest to the twelfth century, and the earliest Greek texts were
of the eighth century. How could a people that was already literate forfeit
its literacy so completely for over four hundred years?

The very fact that none of the Greek philosophers, historians,
geographers, statesmen or poets ever referred to a Dark Age preceeding
the Ionic Age and separating it from the Mycenaean Age, should have been
enough to cast doubt on the soundness of the overall construction.

Wherever we turnpoetry, arms, architecture, artsthe
same Nemesis disturbs the excavator, the explorer and the critic, and
from all sides the very same problem in various forms mockingly stares
in the face of all of them, whatever their persuasion.

Where lies the root of all this confusion, a root hidden
from sight and discussion? The Mycenaean Age in Greece and in the Aegean,
as well as the Minoan Age on Crete, do not have an absolute chronology
of their own, and this is not disputed. As I have already stressed on
several occasions on preceding pages, the dating depends on contacts with
other countries that have an absolute chronology of their own, and Egypt
was selected for that purpose.2

When a cartouche of Queen Tiy was found at Mycenae, that
stratum was dated accordingly to ca. -1400. When in the short-lived city
of Akhet-Aton, built by Akhnaton and abandoned in the same generation,
Mycenaean ware was found in profusion, the ware was regarded as contemporary
with Akhnaton, and was dated to the fourteenth century. We have already
dwelt on the subject, but it needs repetition in the light of what was
brought to discussion all through the foregoing chapters and sections.
In an extended examination of the Egyptian chronology its structure was
put on a scale and found wanting. Now it is clear that if there is a miscalculation
in Egyptian datings, the error must have spread through more than one
land and vitiated more than one nationss chronology.

The problem is once more thrown to Egypt. In Ages in
Chaos we have seen that, with the fall of the Middle Kingdom and the
Exodus synchronized, events in the histories of the peoples of the ancient
world coincide all along the centuries.

For a space of over one thousand years records of Egyptian
history have been compared with the records of the Hebrews, Assyrians,
Chaldeans, and finally with those of the Greeks, with a resulting correspondence
which denotes synchronism.

In Volume I of Ages in Chaos it was shown in great
detail why Akhnaton of the Eighteenth Dynasty must be placed in the latter
part of the ninth century. If Akhnaton flourished in -840 and not in -1380,
the ceramics from Mycenae found in the palace of Akhnaton are younger
by five or six hundred years than they are presumed to be, and the Late
Mycenaean period would accordingly move forward by about half a thousand
years on the scale of time. If the ages of Amenhotep III, of Tiy and of
Akhnaton, need to be reduced by about five hundred years, classical studies
could take a deep breath.

Actually, when in the eighties of the nineteenth century,
the Hellenists were coerced, upon the evidence presented by Egyptologists,
to introduce those five dark centuries, they did it only after a period
of protest and resistance. But now that three generations of historians
have lived with those dark centuries as a historical reality, it is even
more difficult to part with them. Nevertheless, sooner or later, they
will have to part with the phantom centuries, and have the history of
Greece and the development of its writing as a normal process without
a four-hundred-year gap.

The conclusion at which we have arrived is this: between
the Mycenaean and the Ionian Ages there was no Dark Age, but one followed
the other, with only a few decades intervening. The natural catastrophes
of the eighth century and of the beginning of the seventh brought an end
to the civilization that centered at Mycenae in Greece, to cities and
citadels and kingdoms; even the profile of the Greek mainland changed
and many islands submerged and others emerged. These changes moved entire
nations to migrations in the hope that beyond the horizon fertile lands,
not damaged by unchained forces of nature, awaited the conquerors. This
explains the break in continuitythe change is not due to some intervening
dark ages that left no vestige of themselves, but to the paroxysms of
nature and the migrations.

Classical studies have been troubled by many unresolved
situations, archaeological and cultural. The field has been plagued by
the presence of the Dark Agea presence only schematic, never in
effect. It engendered and continues to engender an ever-growing scholarly
literature. If it can be shown that the Egyptian timetable is off its
hinges, the bondage of these studies and their dependence on Egypt may
terminate.

The removal of the Dark Age from the historical sequence
unshackles what was for centuries shackled and releases the scholarly
endeavor from travelling on the same circular paths with no exit from
the modern version of the Cretan Labyrinth. Moreover, it rehabilitates
scholars accused of ignorance or negligence, their having been guilty
only of not perceiving that the problems they dealt with were not problems
at all, as soon as unreal centuries are stricken out.